Who here uses a 27" 4k monitor with 100% scaling? I'm thinking of a replacing a 1440p and 1200p monitor with a single picrel rate my retardation.
Who here uses a 27" 4k monitor with 100% scaling?
Falling into your wing while paragliding is called 'gift wrapping' and turns you into a dirt torpedo pic.twitter.com/oQFKsVISkI— Mental Videos (@MentalVids) March 15, 2023
Why not get a 32" for that purpose? It would be far more appropriate.
Pricier, also I want the whole display in my field of view. I admit the pixel density at 100% might be a bit extreme for 10 hours a day of work.
Is there a reason you don't want to increase scaling at all? Windows will recommend 150% scaling at that size.
lmao windows says I should use 125% scaling on my 15" 1080p laptop, yet at native individual pixels are still resolvable... I think a lot of people in this world, like you, are just genuinely blind
I use one at 150%. 100% is too smol and 200% too big.
As someone who has used 4K at almost every display l size, 32" @ 100% scaling is the definitive sweet spot.
Me, since 2020
>Who here uses a 27" 4k monitor with 100% scaling?
Just change the scaling in your OS.
t. typing this on a 24" 4K display at 175% scale
At 175% scale it's lower effective resolution than 1440p. I want space to keep a lot of windows open without having to turn my head to see opposite sides of the screen.
48 is way too big as a monitor. 32 is probably sweet spot for 4k pixel density but I've used that at the office and even that requires me to turn my head slightly. I miss 30" 2560x1600 bros.
I use a dual 4k 32" setup and I tried disabling scaling for a day.
After that my neck hurt because I was scooting forward so I can read text. If you can tolerate that more power to you but I doubt it.
>I want space to keep a lot of windows open without having to turn my head to see opposite sides of the screen.
>27" 4k monitor with 100% scaling
If you want 4k without scaling get a 48" 4k tv.
Just look around a little for one with proper monitor mode and sufficient response time.
You can even get ones with IPS i think.
32" without scaling is fine if you have working eyes, and really the only issue is windows ui, chrome and everything else scales fine at full res
It isn't fine. I've used both. Minimum size for 4k should be 40" at least without scaling.
I have a 28" 4k and a 15" 4k.
The defaults are 150% and 250% respectively. Those work for me.
100% on the 28" is a little small, but doable.
this right here is why I browse LULZ on a portrait 1440p monitor
the empty space triggers me
27" 4k @ 175% scaling works for me.
That monitor has a genuinely terrible contrast ratio BTW
I do, but my 48" OLED is much more comfortable to look at as it's just so much easier to read things on a larger display with lower PPI. 150% scaling is more usable on the 27", but quite a bit more cramped.
A larger display really is better from a usability standpoint.
I have dual 32" 4k at 100% but text scaling at 125%
27 inch is for 1440p simple as
I used to do it.
It was horrible.
I have the monitor in your picture (27GP950-B), I would forget about 100% scaling
I have this monitor and use 100% scaling :3
I'm using a 15.6" 4k for my travel setup on 100% scaling